GA 4
Niichi Nishiwaki* and Junko Nakajima**
*Faculty of Social Research, Nara University, 1500 Misasagicho,
Nara City, 631-8502, Japan; [email protected]
**Osaka Women's Junior College, 3-8-1 Kasugaoka, Fujiidera City,
Osaka, 583-8558, Japan; [email protected]
ESTABLISHMENT OF INTERNATIONAL CONSENSUS
ON THE REVISION OF THE SYSTEMATICS IN PETROLOGY
AS A CASE STUDY OF GEOETHICAL PROCESS
Abstract
The progress of science has been realized with the development of a special
language to facilitate the communication and understanding within the experts.
The systematics
concerns the classification,nomenclature, terminology and other topics for the
standard
description of materials and events, and the systematics is an integral part of
each
science.
In the geological sciences, the systematics in petrology defines the
rock
names to geological specimens, which is used not only as the key item of
geological
databases but also as the limiting condition of geological theories and models.
The systematics in petrology should be revised according to the progress of
geological theories and the accumulation of data. The IUGS-CSP (Commission of
Systematics in Petrology) had discussed the systematics in petrology for many
years, and several
important reports and proposals were published especially on igneous and
metamorphic petrology.
The IUGS-CSP was closed in 2008 because of the
decrease of interest on
the systematics in petrology within the geological communities.
However, further
revision of the systematics in petrology is necessary, because the progress of
geology
is continuing, and because many inconsistencies are still left in the present
systematics.
For the re-organization of the international commission, it is important to explain
the
importance of the
systematics,
encourage the petrologists, and obtain the
internationalconsensus for the revision of systematics in petrology. In the course
of study,
geoethical view points should be included, such as the negotiation within
different
branches of geological sciences, regulation between developed and developing
countries, balancing of areal distribution of members, planning of road map of
future
revision, and others.
Key words: Systematics, Classification, Nomenclature, Terminology, Petrology,
Consensus, Geoethics
Introduction
The systematics in petrology is a field of research on the systematic
description and classification in petrology, and includes the following studies
(Nishiwaki, 2002).
- Standardization of data collection and accumulation
- Guideline for description
- Nomenclature/terminology
- Rule of classification
- Classification table and diagram
- Evaluation of classification criteria
The systematics in petrology is diverged because the target areas and rocks
are
varied
according
to
the
development
of
petrology.
New
theories
and
measurement techniques have been developed in recent years, and new types of
data have been added to the traditional data.
Classical and/or traditional
systematics should be reviewed based on current knowledge and hypotheses
(Nishiwaki, 2003a,b).
The
following
types
of
data
should
be
prepared
for
the
study
of
the
systematics in petrology (Nishiwaki, 2002).
- Sample description (ID, Rock type, Date, Collector, Locality, Depository)
- Geological description (Horizon, Age, Environment, Tectonics)
- Field observation (Thickness, Size, Structure, Weathering, Alternation,
Deformation)
- Laboratory observation (Color, Grain size, Roundness, Sphericity, Sorting,
Cement, Texture, Fossil)
- Compositional analysis (Granulometry, Mineral composition)
- Chemical analysis (Major elements, Trace element, REE, Isotope)
- Physical analysis (Porosity, Permeability, Resistivity)
- Graphic document (Photo, Sketch, Chart)
- Digital data (Analytical chart, Measurement log, Database)
The systematics should be based on the synthesized data that are globally
collected, critically evaluated and standardized, and referred by all researchers.
It is expected that database systems connected with the Internet should be
constructed for this purpose (Chayes, 1985, Brandle and Nagy, 1995; NishiwakiNakajima, 1995).
Statistical and mathematical processing are necessary not only for evaluation
and
standardization
of
data,
but
constructing geological models.
also
for
clarifying
the
data
structure
and
These results should be reviewed and evaluated
to extract useful information for new systematics (Brandle and Nishiwaki, 2006;
Nishiwaki and Brandle, 2007).
Importance of the Systematics
The nomenclature and standard description of rocks form an integral part of a
wide variety of geological data files, and the geological theories also frequently
use rock names in their statements (D'Alessandro et al., 1977). A specific
science should have an own vocabulary to facilitate the communication and
understanding,
however
they
are
hindered
by
the
diversity
of
classification
systems, especially by the multiplicity of equivalent or overlapping rock names.
Prof. Streckeisen was very interested in the unification of the petrological
classification from 1960's, especially for numerical features on modal analysis in
plutonic rocks and chemical composition in volcanic rocks.
The importance of
the systematics in petrology for the development of geological sciences was
recognized, and the IUGS established one subcommission for the systematics in
igneous petrology in 1968 (Streckeisen, 1978).
The systematics is not only the descriptive tool but also a fundamental part of
petrology, which defines the framework of petrology. So the systematics should
be carefully determined.
Rule vs Recommendation
The systematics is composed of different branches, and the definition mode of
each branch should de different. For example, the nomenclature should be
concretely defined to avoid the confusion such as synonymy and homonymy, and
the names without necessary definition should be invalid, like the zoological
nomenclature (Stoll, 1964). On the other hand, the description cannot be strictly
defined because of variation of material, condition, observation system and
model, and only a guideline can be defined. Some part of rule and guideline may
be
only
the
recommendation,
as
the
different
opinions
require
different
terminology and/or method. It is important to accept such a flexibility for the
usefulness of the systematics.
Permanent vs Tentative
It is necessary for the actual application that the systematics in petrology is
clearly defined at any time, otherwise no one will use the systematics. The
systematics should not be so frequently revised or modified that petrologists and
other geoscientists can accept.
However,
the
development
observation
content
of
of
petrology.
methods,
and
systematics
should
For
example,
new
new
petrological
be
data,
models
revised
new
to
rock
should
be
adopt
the
groups,
new
accepted
on
occasion.
That is, the systematics cannot be permanent, but it should not be tentative at
any time.
International vs Local
The
petrology
principally
is
a
global
international,
that
science,
is,
any
and
the
systematics
petrologist
in
the
in
world
petrology
will
use
is
one
systematics. The systematics should be defined under the global discussion, and
authorized by an international organization and/or communities.
However it is difficult to gather all the data and opinions in the world to a
specific committee, and also it is more difficult to reach a complete consensus. It
is not realistic to push a strict rule regardless the local condition. Some part of
the systematics should accept some exceptions to adopt the local condition, by
replacing the guideline to the recommendations if necessary. Such ambiguity will
help the actual use of the systematics.
Disciplinary vs General
The systematics in petrology is a part of petrology, and its main users are
petrologists.
So
the
systematics
should
be
defined
by
the
petrological
communities in principle, otherwise the exact meaning of the systematics cannot
be properly evaluated.
However, the rock name and its compositional data will be used not only
within petrology but also in other branches of geoscience as a basic control
factor of geological models. Furthermore, the rock name will be used as a part of
description
of
natural
phenomena
outside
of
geosciences,
without
precise
understanding of the classification, which may lead to severe misunderstandings.
And we may consider such a use by general citizens. That is, the systematics is
a disciplinary guideline, but it should consider the general use.
Top-down vs Bottom-up
The systematics should be defined with an international consensus, which will
be
obtained
by
some
commissions.
The
member
of commission
should be
erected by considering not only the speciality but also the area of candidates.
The number of commission members is limited, and the draft should be circulated
within
petrological
communities
for
reviewing
and
correction
by
using
the
Internet reviewing. The final decision of the systematics should be made at the
general assembly of the IUGS or other international organization to authorize the
systematics.
The construction of the systematics is a bottom-up process in petrological
community as cited above. The decided systematics should be used not only by
petrologists
but
also
other
scientists
by
proclaiming
from
the
authorized
community, and the distribution of the systematics is a top-down process for
scientists in general.
Distribution and Education
It is necessary for the actual use to distribute the decided systematics to the
world, by publishing the guidebook and technical manual in which the detailed
concepts are clearly explained.
The technical seminar should be held to support
the petrologists who describe the rocks in their academic journals, where actual
process of the description is explained.
Also the seminar on the concept and
use of the systematics for other scientists and technicians is necessary, which
will help the proper use of the systematics in petrology.
Especially seminars for
the database managers are useful, as the petrological data are included in many
scientific and technological databases.
Furthermore, the special account for the developing countries is important for
the international use of the systematics. Technical seminars should be held at
many points in the world to encourage the petrologists in the developing
countries near the point, together with the support of the system to introduce the
systematics into their laboratories. For this seminar we may cooperate with the
UNESCO and other international organizations.
Conclusion
It is clarified that we may consider many geoethical view points on the
construction of the systematics in petrology, such as the negotiation within
different branches of geological sciences, regulation between developed and
developing countries, balancing of areal distribution of members, planning of
road map of future revision, and others. The systematics in petrology cannot be
used without these geoethical considerations.
References
Stoll,
N.
R.
(ed.)
(1964)
International
Code
of
Zoological
Nomenclature.
International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London, 177 p.
Brändle, J. L. and Nagy, G. (1995) The state of the 5th version of IGBA: Igneous
petrological data base.
Computers & Geosciences, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 425-432.
Brandle, J. L. and Nishiwaki, N. (2006) Importance of systematics in petrology in
relation to geochemical classification of igneous rocks. Proceedings of the IAMG
'06 (2006 Annual Conf. of the IAMG, Liege, Belgium), CD-ROM, sec. 7-2-1, pp. 15.
Chayes, F. (1985) IGBADAT: A world data base for igneous petrology. Episodes,
vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 245-251.
D'Alessandro, M., Potenza, R., Hubaux, A. and Hügi, Th. (1977)
inquiry on rock.
COGEODATA
names and descriptions. Jb. Miner, Abh., vol. 129,
no. 1, pp.
43-65.
Nishiwaki-Nakajima, N. (1995) Global database project in sedimentary petrology
(IGCP 269). Sedimentary Facies and Paleogeography, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 71-81.
Nishiwaki,
N.
(2001)
Revision
of
systematics
in
sedimentary
petrology
with
special reference on sandstone composition in tectonic provinces. Proceedings
of the IAMG 2001 (7th Annual Conference of the International Association for
Mathematical Geology, Cancun, Mexico) CD-ROM, Section H, pp. 13.1-13.11
Nishiwaki, N. (2002) Review and revision of systematics in sedimentary petrology
with reference to statistical and mathematical analyses of sedimentary data.
Terra Nostra, no. 03/2002 (Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference of the
International Association for Mathematical Geology, Berlin, Germany), pp. 367371
Nishiwaki,
N.
(2003a)
Review
of
systematics
statistical and mathematical view points.
in
sedimentary
petrology
from
Proceedings of the IAMG 2003 (9th
Annual Conference of the International Association for Mathematical Geology,
Portsmouth, UK), CD-ROM; sec. 12, pp. N1-N5.
Nishiwaki,
N.
Proceeding
of
(2003b)
Mining
Review
Pribram
of
systematics
Symposium
in
2003,
sedimentary
International
petrology.
Section
of
Geoethics, Pribram, pp. GA51-GA56
Nishiwaki, N. and Brandle, J. L. (2007) Importance of systematics in petrology
with special reference to mathematical data analysis.
'07
(Annual
Geology,
Conference
Beijing,
China
of
the
International
"Geomathematics
Proceedings of the IAMG
Association
and
GIS
for
Analysis
Mathematical
of
Resources,
Environment and Hazards"), pp. 51-55
Nishiwaki, N. (2008) Importance of geoethical view points for the revision of
systematics
in
petrology.
Abstracts
of
the
33rd
International
Geological
Congress, Oslo, CD-ROM, Sec. IEE-07 Geoethics
Streckeisen, A. (1978) IUGS Subcommission on the Systematics of Igneous
Rocks.
Classification
and
Nomenclature
of
Volcanic
Rocks,
Lamprophyres,
Carbonatites and Melilitic Rocks. Recommendations and Suggestions. Neues
Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, vol 134, no. 1, pp. 1-14.